“The developer has never offered RM200,000 per family... never. The chief minister got it all wrong. Perhaps he is getting wrong (information) from the wrong people,” he said, calling on Lim Guan Engto visit the village to get first-hand information.

Lim had said yesterday that the village residents wereoffered up to RM200,000 per family by the developer, and that the sum had been accepted by some, while many others have chosen to stay put at the site.

He also said the developer would have evicted the residents in the middle of last year if not for the state government's timely intervention, which Steven duly acknowledged.

Nusmetro, meanwhile, has agreed to give a month's grace as of yesterday, to allow the state government to explore ways to resolve the predicament amicably.

Deputy Chief Minister 2 P Ramasamy announced this when he met the residents at the village yesterday afternoon. He also said the state government is working overtime on the matter.

“We understand your pain. We will do our best to achieve an amicable solution,” he assured them, in the presence of DCM 1 Mansor Othman, village legal adviser Cecil Rajendra and PKR state assistant secretary M Nyanasegaran.

The villages had filed an application yesterday morning to set aside an ex-parte order dated June 16 obtained by the land office, landowner Koperasi Pegawai-Pegawai Kanan Kerajaan Pulau Pinang and Nusmetro to issue a writ of possession effective tomorrow.

The application was filed on the behalf of the residents by lawyer Darshan Singh Khaira.Three demands submitted

Yesterday evening, some 150 Hindu Rights Action Force activists and villagers held a rally outside Komtar to protest against what they called the “incompetence and ineptness” of the state government in resolving the problem.

They passed three resolutions and submitted these to Mansor at a dialogue session in Komtar after the rally. They want the state government to:

stop the developer from demolishing the village;

provide an alternative site for the Oasis project; and

include three representatives, comprising the village association chairperson M Sugumaran and assistant secretary C Tharmaraj, and Hindraf activist N Ganesan in the state investigation team probing the alleged land scam in this matter.

Mansor, who heads the inquiry panel, said he would refer the resolutions to the state executive council for a decision.

Kampung Buah Pala is known among locals as the 'Tamil High Chaparral' - named after the popular television series - because of its population of cowherds, cattle and goats.

PETALING JAYA, 1 July 2009: Attempts to seek clarification about the Prime Minister's Special Fund for parliamentarians have been futile despite several phone calls, SMSes and e-mail enquiries to the relevant officials.

Khalid Ramli (Source: isis.org.my) The Nut Graph wrote to Implementation Coordination Unit (ICU) director-general Tan Sri Khalid Ramli for a response to claims by some Pakatan Rakyat Members of Parliament and also a former Barisan Nasional (BN) MP that their applications to tap the fund were treated in an ad hoc manner.

However, Khalid conveyed through an aide in June that he would not reply. The Nut Graph report, Funding our MPs, was published without his comments.

The article highlighted the varying responses experienced by MPs in their requests for funds. MPs were either not told when the funds were disbursed, or were asked to seek funding from the PR-led state government, especially in a case where the MP was from PR.

A BN MP had his applications on behalf of non-Muslim houses of worship rejected, while requests for mosques were approved.

Mohamed Yakcop (Pic by Jeff Ooi;source: Wiki commons)The ICU falls under the Prime Minister's Department and is responsible for approving MPs' applications. The money is disbursed to the State Development Offices (SDOs) for project implementation. SDOs are federal agencies.

Enquiries were also sent to Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop, who oversees the ICU. To date, a week after questions were sent, no reply has been forthcoming.

An aide to Nor Mohamed said the minister, whose portfolio includes finance, was busy in meetings preparing for major policy changes on liberalising capital markets, which were announced yesterday on 30 June.

The same questions were posed to both the ICU director-general and to the minister. They were queries on:

the ICU's official policy when approving applications by opposition MPs;

the official policy on applications for non-Muslim-related projects;

the timeframe for approvals, disbursement of funds, and project implementation; and

how the ICU ensures that there is no discrimination against opposition MPs.

Funding sources available to MPs for their constituencies is of public interest as it involves taxpayers' money.

During the run-up to the 2008 General Elections, some political parties made promises to re-introduce the elections of local councillors – a right Malaysians enjoyed until the late 60s. As you are aware, having elected local councillors will aid in the practice of democratic governance by ensuring, inter alia, greater participation by the Rakyat and better accountability by the local councillors. There have been some discussions on whether we are able to re-introduce local government elections process without amendments to the Local Government Act 1976, the Federal Constitution and/or other legislation, and the models of local government elections which will best suit Malaysia.

The Law Reform & Special Areas Committee of the Bar Council will be organising a public forum on “Local Government Elections: Now, Later or Never?” on Saturday, 10th October 2009, 8am – 2pm at the Bar Council Auditorium to encourage discussions for a deeper understanding on these matters.

Areas of Discussion:

(1) “Losing the third vote: A critical appreciation of the political landscape of the 1960s.”The focus will be on the Report on the Royal Commission of Enquiry to Investigate into the Workings of Local Authorities in West Malaysia, the Report of the Committee to Study the Implications of the Report on the Royal Commission of Enquiry to Investigate into the Workings of Local Authorities in West Malaysia and in particular, the impact of the report annexed therein, prepared by the Bahagian Kemajuan Pentadbiran, Jabatan Perdana Menteri dated January 1971.

(2) “Local government elections by individual states: Are there legal barriers?”The focus will on the impact of the relevant sections in the various pieces of legislation including the Local Government Act 1976, the Local Government Elections Act 1960, Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act 1973, the relevant state constitutions, the existing Emergency Ordinances and the Federal Constitution.

(3) “Will elected local councillors do a better job?”The focus will on a comparative study to past councilors and state benefits of elected local councilors.

We shall keep members informed of further developments on the public forum!

KUALA LUMPUR, July 1 (Bernama) -- There are no plans currently to introduce a third stimulus package as Malaysia wants to avoid incurring too high a fiscal deficit, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said here, Wednesday.

The government has so far introduced two stimulus packages totalling RM67 billion.

Najib, who is also Finance Minister, said the second stimulus package worth RM60 billion unveiled in March this year was designed to cover a period of two years.

The first package valued at RM7 billion was introduced in November last year.

"I am trying to avoid a third stimulus package. There is a risk of that (higher fiscal deficit) happening if we introduce a third package."

"But if there are ways where we can further stimulate our economy, I am quite open to it if necessary. I am keeping a very close watch in terms of the fiscal deficit," he said during an interview with financial news television channel CNBC aired over Astro's channel 518 this morning.

He was responding to a question as to whether Malaysia would introduce a third stimulus package if the global economy and Malaysia encounters a downside later this year.

However, if there was a third package, the funds would have to be drawn from the liquidity in the market and not from the government's account, he said.

When asked whether there would be any further downgrade assessments in Malaysia's economic growth, Najib said it all depends on how these stimulus packages work.

"So, if the economic packages work well, then we (Malaysia) should be on track to achieve the contraction of four to five percent as we predicted," he said.

He said that in the second half of this year, the economy should see a step up in terms of the implementation (of the package) and the funds being disbursed.

The government had in May announced that the economy would contract by between -4.0 and -5.0 percent this year.

To another question, Najib said the government has no plans to internationalise the ringgit in view of the risks involved. "

We have learnt a painful lesson from the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997/98."

He said there was no demand for that (internationalising the ringgit) to happen because the ringgit was readily exchangeable anywhere.

"We do not want to manipulate the market in any way. Allow the ringgit to find its true value. That has been our policy and we will maintain our policy," he said.

The ringgit opened at 3.52 against the U.S. dollar this morning from 3.51 yesterday.

Ipoh Timor MP Lim Kit Siang, who arrived later, said DAP MPs do not run away from problems and were willing to talk to Hindraf on the matter.

He said DAP stands for “justice for all races”, and that Hindraf should not hurl allegations at the party.

The matter is of great concern, he said, but the hands of the Penang government were tied because of decisions made by the previous Gerakan-led state government.

Other DAP leaders present were Ipoh Barat MP, M Kulasegaran and Perak exco member A Sivanesan.

'Not unduly worried'

Earlier today, staff at the DAP headquarters in Petaling Jaya said they were not unduly worried about the protest.

Head of staff Foo Yueh Chuan said when contacted that Hindraf had not provided direct information about the protest.

She said the party only found out about this through media reports and text-messages that were circulated.

The party headquarters, with a staff-force about 15, is located in a housing area in Paramont Garden, Petaling Jaya.

Apart from the Kampung Buah Pala issue, Hindraf is also unhappy that the DAP-led government in Penang has not tackled problems affecting the Indian Malaysian community.

The organisers had planned to mobilise some 10,000 activists to demonstrate outside Komtar - which houses the Penang government office - and DAP offices in Petaling Jaya, Ipoh, Damansara, Seremban, Johor Bahru and Malacca.

These rallies, the first by Hindraf against a Pakatan Rakyat ally, are a blow to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, who has positioned his government as one based on competency, accountability and transparency.

The Penang government is reluctant to acquire the Kampung Buah Pala on behalf of residents because it would have to pay up to RM30 million.

While the state government did not give a specific price tag for the acquisition, the figure is based on an estimated value for the plot of the land which the village is sitting on.

Ng Wei Aik (right), the political secretary to Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, said: "To acquire Kampung Buah Pala land would involve a lot of money, and we would need federal funding.”

Ng, also the Komtar assemblyperson, said this after receiving an appeal letter from Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).

The land is owned by Koperasi Pegawai Kanan Kerajaan Pulau Pinang.

Hindraf's letter was handed over by its youngest activist, seven-year-old Vwaishhnnavi, the daughter of chairperson P Waythamoorthy.

Vwaishhnnavi was accompanied by her mother K Shanti and some 50 Hindraf activists and villagers.

In an immediate response, however, Waythamoorthy rubbished Ng's claim, saying the state government would in no way be affected financially by a land acquisition exercise.

He slammed Lim for trying to “hoodwink the people” by citing finance as an excuse, just so he could shirk his responsibilities as chief minister, instead of using powers accorded to the chief minister by land laws.

He claimed that Lim can acquire the land for the public interest at a sum far below the market price.

Under Section 58 of the Land Acquisition Act, the state government is required to give reasonable compensation to the affected party or parties during any such exercise.

“This is stated clearly under Schedule 1 of the Act,” said Waythamoorthy, adding that the same provision allows the state government to make periodic payments to settle the sum.

He also said the state government need not fear civil action by any developer because Section 68 of the same Act clearly states that 'no party can bring any suit against government in regard to the compensated sum'.

The affected party is, however, allowed to lodge a complaint to the land administrator, which is empowered to bring up the issue in court for a review.

“Even then the state government has overwhelming power over the matter. Lim is giving us a false impression,” said Waythamoorthy, who is living in London in self-imposed exile.

The federal government banned Hindraf last October.

Waythamoorthy chided the state government for trying to inject 'superficial optimism' that its investigation team would resolve all problems pertaining to the villagers' predicament.

Expressing dissatisfaction with the composition, Waythamoorthy said the commmitte should also include “independent persons of high public esteem”, and not merely DAP legislators.

“After all, only a few days ago, the villagers had demanded Rayer's resignation as their elected representative,” he said.

'Correct BN wrongdoing'

In its appeal letter, Hindraf called on the chief minister to exercise his executive powers under the National Land Code, read together with Land Acquisition Act, to acquire the land for the people of Kampung Buah Pala.

Shanti slammed the state government for its incompetence in handling the matter, and chided the chief minister for not being around to receive the letter.

Ng, however, assured Hindraf that the state government has assigned top priority to the issue.

Responding to a statement issued by Lim today, Waythamoorthy pointed out that the chief minister must be prepared to shoulder the burden of liabilities and wrongdoing by the previous administration, since he has also inherited its assets.

“Hindraf is not blaming Lim as the cause of the Kampung Buah Pala controversy. Hindraf is fighting this case on (grounds of) social justice and natural justice, not due to communal sentiments,” he added.

“We want the current chief minister to correct the wrongs done by the Barisan Nasional government."

I read with care your posting on the call to HINDRAF to wake up and not blame you for the people’s predicament.

You may well remember (or perhaps you and your kuncu-kuncu have now forgotten) that before the last General elections these residents of Kg.Buah Pala did see you and your Kuncus to highlight their problem. Mind you they were already at that time battling a losing war in the Malaysian Courts of Injustice. You and you kuncus made promises that should you win and take over the State you would give the people of Kg.Buah Pala a SOLUTION.

You cant be as stupid as you sound. You know pretty well what you are talking about. The losing LEGAL battle of these poor and defenseless people are separate matter all together so I repeat DON’T PRETEND TO BE A FOOL AND NOT UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE ISSUE AT HAND.” Do not hide behind the Federal Court Ruling and say that you respect and uphold the Rule of Law. The residents are now not talking about the decision of the Federal Court but THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SOULTION THAT YOU HAD PROMISED THEM BEFORE THE ELECTIONS. In any event if you had respected the Rule of Law why then did you when you were jailed many years ago claim that you were wronged by the decision of the highest court of Law. If you respect the Rule of Law that you are talking about then we should all accept and refer you as EX CONVICT the CM of Penang.

Now coming back to the issue of SOLUTION you knew pretty well even before the elections that the SOLUTION lies in the LAND ACQUISATION ACT but somehow now you pretend to play dumb by talking about the Ruling of the Federal Court and that you do not have powers to question the said Ruling.

The ONLY PERSON in the State of Penang who can find the solution is you as you are the sole person under the above act who could ACQUIRE THE LAND for these poor people. Let us not deviate from The Court Rulings or the wrong doing of the previous government or UMNO bla bla. Those are separate matters which need to be addressed by the authorities in the country and as a Parliamentarian I would expect you to make a big ho ha in parliament on this and not foolishly try to deviate by attacking HINDRAF.

Shame on you Guan Eng as even as an ordinary layman I can see the manipulation of your words.

Now coming back to the LAND ACQUISATION ACT, perhaps you may want to read the following sections and seek proper legal help- Sec 3,8, 18,19,21,22,36,49,58,60,63.

Well I don’t want to go on the whole lot of the act but let me remind you of your mighty powers as a Chief Minister under

section 3 (1) The State authority may acquire any land which is needed

(a) for any public purpose

(b) ……for any purpose which in the opinion of the State authorities beneficial to the economic development of Malaysia…… or to public generally or any class of the public

Now the question is why are you refusing to use this power conferred upon you???? Answer this Guan Eng and don’t pretend to be like a fool hiding behind the decision of the Federal Court. Yes the Court has made a decision but these people have been battling their losing war long before you became the CM. Now that they have lost they are asking you to fulfill your election promises which are a separate matter.

Perhaps now that you sit in that mighty seat of yours you have forgotten your promises because at the time of making those promises you knew you wouldn’t fulfill anyway so what the heck. Now do you stand to benefit from the developing project which would enrich an UMNO company? Perhaps you have been promised a cut by UMNO I don’t know!!!!

But you are answerable to the rakyat why you are refusing to use the above section.

Yes may be you have prevented the demolition of the Kg since last year. But you didn’t have to use your mighty power to do that – only the power of persuasion that you held as Chief Minister.

We may be simple people but we understand well the meaning and difference between the power of persuasion and the absolute power you hold as a CM.

Thank you for providing all the minute details of the dealings between the previous CM and the UMNO linked company but that smells of corrupt practice by the previous Government. Why are you saying all these only now – even so it is a matter public interest that as a responsible CM you should have lodged Police reports against the BN culprits and not shift the blame on HINDRAF to demonstrate against the BN. You may well bring this to the Parliament- and I ask you why now Guan eng ???? Were you trying to cover up for them????

Let me now take a passage from your writing

“The Penang state government regrets the highly irresponsible and irrational actions of Hindraf in targeting the Penang state government over the actions taken by the developer to evict residents in Kampung Buah Pala. Hindraf wants the state government to act against the court order obtained by the developer to evict the residents. This the state government can not do as Pakatan Rakyat governs under the rule of law and is compelled to respect any court order issued.”

HINDRAF or the Kg People never said anywhere that “they wanted you to act against the court order”. Let us be focused Guan Eng don’t be mischievous. Don’t say things that were never said or else you will be “torched” as a liar. Don’t have an addition to the Ex convict pangkat you already have.

Yes no doubt the eviction is by the Capitalist Developers. But again only you have the power to stop this by invoking your power under Sec 3 on grounds of PUBLIC INTEREST. The people are angry because you are not doing anything on the eviction WHEN YOU COULD ACQUIRE THE LAND.

Now lets see this ;

“On the other hand, there have been suggestions that the Penang state government forcibly acquires the land under for a public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act. Doing so would play into the hands into the developer who would be able to reap enormous profits without putting in a single cent.”

What do you mean by saying doing so would mean to allow the developer to reap enormous profits without putting a single cent ?? Come on those guys paid for it albeit for a lesser price.

“Much as the Penang state government would wish to do, cancelling the project and forcibly acquiring the land would incur costs beyond the financial capability of the state government. We are NOT talking about millions of ringgit or tens of millions of ringgit here!”

Oi are you saying you are going to lose hundreds of million ringgit here. OOO when the land was forcibly cheated from the villagers it was merely about 3 million at value but now within few years it has rocketed to hundreds of millions. But read the official statement given by your own assemblyman for Komtar and your Political Secretary today in Malaysiakini that the State would need RM 30 million to compensate the developers. So which is which now Guan ENG- hundreds of million or 30 million. Are you trying to do a BN on us by claiming hundreds of millions out of this whole sage and then shortchange the “poor and helpless developer” by paying them peanuts of 30 million ringgit?????

Look at the second line of the above statement- “canceling the project”- canceling whose project Guan ENG? Why are you worried about the developers having to cancel their projects. The Acquisition Act does not provide for compensation for “cancelled projects”. I wonder why you seem to worry for them. Are you losing your commissions????

In any event why jump the gun on the amount to be compensated by the State Government in event of ACQUISITION????. The procedures on payment comes much after a long procedure to be complied by your state as per Sections 18 – 35. Those are clear procedures and in event the compensation are not agreed upon by the developer then go to Part V of the Act ie Section 36-51.

To cut a long story short the amount of compensation to be paid are to be determined by the Land Administrator after valuations and survey. If this award is not accepted the developer is not entitled to go to Court and he needs the cooperation of the Land Administrator to take it up to the Court. Even in Court look at section 40 (2), the Court would have to appoint 2 assessors and there is a whole list of possible reputable persons who could assist the Judge on the assessment of compensation.

So Guan Eng Look at the Act clearly- Do you now fear the “Rule of Law” that you highly spoke about.

Its funny when it comes to the point of protecting the poor and helpless, it is decided arbitrarily but when it comes to the right of the Capitalist Developers the whole works of the system are with them- The Judiciary, Government and its Machinery, Police, Lawyers, Politicians and the latest the “great political party which championed the rights of the people DAP”.

So Guan Eng stop the lie of having to pay out hundreds of millions of compensation. The poor people need protection and not your lies.

Do not divert to Hindraf not demonstrating against other party- the point is at the moment , as it stands you and only you have the POWER and if you do not exercise it for the benefit of the poor and helpless who had legally occupied the Land under trust for 200 years until they were cheated then why the hell did the people give you the power????

You don’t have to talk about the first Indian Deputy Chief Minister. Mind you if not for Waytha Moorthy issuing statements and demanding for a Deputy Chief Minister immediately after the General elections you wouldn’t even have bothered to put your puppet Ramasamy.

Don’t pull the wool by saying DAP did this and that for the Indians. Yes you would have done it but so what? Isn’t that your duty.

I do not want to comment on your other points meant to divert from the main issue at hand ie ACQUISATION.

THE PEOPLE OF KG BUAH PALA ARE FOCUSSED AND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT AND SO DO YOU. STOP THE NONSENCE OF PRETENDING IGNORANCE AND GET TO THE POINT GUAN ENG. I DARE YOU REFUTE MY WRITE UP.

PUTRAJAYA, June 30 – The Court of Appeal here today overruled the public prosecutor’s preliminary objections against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal to move his Sodomy II trial back to the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court.

The panel of three judges said they would continue to hear the merits of Anwar’s appeal tomorrow morning.

Justice Datuk Abdull Hamid Embong, who headed the bench today, told both sides to prepare their arguments to directly address the heart of the dispute by tomorrow, which focuses on whether the controversial certificate of transfer, signed by the Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail is valid or not.

The court wants answers on three key points: the concept of “legitimate expectation” (which is basically the assurance then Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi gave Anwar’s wife and daughter that Abdul Gani will not be in any way involved in Anwar’s second sodomy case); the doctrine of necessity; and the question of perceived bias.

Anwar has consistently maintained that Abdul Gani, whom he accuses of having a hand in falsifying his records in the first sodomy case in 1998, is biased.

The Court of Appeal also granted a stay of proceedings in the KL High Court tomorrow.

The High Court was earlier scheduled to hear Anwar’s application against the public prosecutor for allegedly withholding important evidence connected to his trial.

PETALING JAYA, June 30 – A planned protest by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) at DAP’s headquarters here fizzled out after 10 minutes when police moved in to disperse the protestors.

The 15 Hindraf members who had gathered to demonstrate against the imminent demolition of the Kampung Buah Pala settlement in Penang were outnumbered by both journalists and police personnel.

Hindraf coordinator K.Selvam, who led the protest, said they wanted the DAP-led Penang Government to honour their election promises and save the home of the 200 Indian settlers.

Ipoh Barat MP M. Kulasegaran and Sungkai Assemblyman A. Sivanesan arrived shortly after most of the protesters had dispersed but had a showdown with police when they attempted to speak to the Hindraf members who were still on the scene.

Tempers flared as police instructed both the DAP elected representatives to disperse.

However, Sivanesan invited the Hindraf members and media into the party headquarters.

“The protesters were just airing their legitimate concerns and the DAP were ready to hear them out,” he said.

DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang, who arrived later from Parliament said he had left instructions for all party leaders to meet the Hindraf supporters, who had also planned simultaneous protests at all DAP headquarters in all states.

He blamed the problem on the previous Penang Gerakan state government which had sold the 2.6 hectare land to a private developer, at RM10 a square foot.

Lim said the developer is planning to build 490 condominium units and had estimated the development value to be RM150 million, leaving the present state government to deal with the mess.

BOTH the Penang deputy chief ministers went to the ground today to meet with Kampung Buah Pala squatter villagers facing eviction on Thursday by a developer as demonstrations on the matter took place here, in Petaling Jaya and Ipoh.

Mansor Othman and P. Ramasamy told the residents of the village, dubbed Penang's High Chapparal, that the developer had agreed to give the villagers one month to move out and that the state government would find a solution by then.

The Federal Court had ruled in favour of the developer on June 11, leaving the 300 villagers occupying 41 houses in the 100-year-old Indian settlement with no choice but to move out by Thursday as the developer desired.

After the meeting with Mansor and Ramasamy, villager A. Drabiam, 84, urged the state government to have the village returned to the residents as promised by Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) advisor Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim during the general election campaign last year. He claimed that Anwar had not visited the village since.

Meanwhile, about 100 villagers gathered peacefully at about 4pm at the Kompleks Tun Abdul Razak where the office of Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng is located to hand over a memorandum to him. They were instructed to move to Auditorium A on the fifth floor of the building after the police ordered them to disperse.

After waiting for three hours, the disappointed villagers were given an assurance by the chief minister's political secretary Ng Wei Aik that Lim would meet them.

The villagers dispersed at 7.15pm after Mansor arrived at Komtar to listen to their complaints and views.

In PETALING JAYA, 11 people claiming to be members of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) carrying banners and posters protesting against so-called oppression of the Indian residents of Kampung Buah Pala, staged a demonstration in front of the DAP headquarters there at 3.40pm.

Five minutes later, the police arrived and they dispersed.

The doors and windows of the DAP headquarters were closed then and there was no sign of anyone being in the building.

After the demonstrators left, DAP Parliamentary Leader Lim Kit Siang and Ipoh Barat Member of Parliament M. Kula Segaran arrived at the office.

Kit Siang told reporters that his door was always open for them.

Asked why he came after the group had left, he said he was tied down in Parliament.

In IPOH, 30 people claiming to be Hindraf members carrying banners and posters walked for about 100 metres to Wisma DAP before dispersing on the orders of the police.

One of them, P. Ramesh, said the demonstration was held to send a message to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng not to falter on the issue.

He said he hoped that Lim would resolve the issue quickly and added that they believed that he had the power to do so. - BERNAMA********

By SEBASTIAN JULES, CHRISTINA CHIN and ANDREW SAGAYAM

The Star

GEORGE TOWN: The impending demolition of Kampung Buah Pala, popularly known as Penang’s High Chaparral and regarded by some as a cultural icon, continued to fuel emotions, but while activists staged protests, cooler heads prevailed elsewhere.

The developers of a proposed apartment project at the village has agreed to defer demolition work for one month to allow the state government and residents to resolve the situation, Penang Deputy Chief Minister II Dr P. Ramasamy said.

The temporary reprieve came after the developers met with a select investigation committee headed by Deputy Chief Minister I Mansor Othman on Tuesday.

The residents filed an application Monday to set aside an ex-parte order dated June 16 obtained by the North-East land administrator, Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Pulau Pinang Bhd and Nusmetro Venture, to issue a writ of possession, which is to be enforced at 11am on July 2.

“A court bailiff will come and serve the writ but the demolition will not proceed,” said Dr Ramasamy.

“The one month will give the state government time to investigate and hopefully review the plan,” he added.

Earlier, Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) members came out in force to push the Penang government into using its executive powers to save Kampung Buah Pala.

Some 20 members from Kuala Lumpur, Seremban and Penang congregated at Komtar here with about 30 village residents to hand over a letter of appeal to Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and express their reproach on alleged “broken promises”.

“Before the March 2008 general election, there were so many promises but now, everybody is keeping quiet.

“They tell us to take them to the national level, but they cannot even handle state problems.

“If they fail to save the village, Pakatan Rakyat’s objective has failed and we will know what to do in the next general election,” said Penang Island Hindraf Coordinator K. Kalaiselvam, 34.

Carrying Hindraf chairman S. Waythamoorthy’s seven-year-old daughter Vwaishhnnavi who held a handwritten letter of appeal addressed to Lim, Kalaiselvam led the delegation that arrived at Komtar at about 10.40am.

The group encountered a brief confrontation with Komtar security guards who instructed them to choose five representatives to hand over the letter.

Ten representatives were eventually allowed in to meet with Lim’s political secretary Ng Wei Aik who instructed police to allow the entire group to enter the tower and proceed to Auditorium A.

Ng addressed the crowd around 11am and tempers flared among the visiting group when they were informed Lim was engaged in previously arranged appointments.

“We faxed Lim a letter yesterday (Monday) morning and got no reply. He has been given every opportunity to meet with High Chaparral but until now, he has not even visited the village once. Why is he avoiding us?

“It has been 16 months since Pakatan Rakyat took power and until now, promises remain promises,” said Penang Hindraf advisor K. Maran, 48.

On Ng’s explanation that the state exco had formed a committee to investigate allegations of foul play on the transfer of the land in Bukit Gelugor on which the village stands, Vwaishhnnavi’s mother K. Shanti, 38, said that was “the state’s problem”.

“We are not interested the state forming committees. In two days time, the developers are coming to demolish the village.

“We voted Pakatan because we believed they would be better than the previous government. But there is no difference between Barisan Nasional and you,” she told Ng.

“If Pakatan fails to save the village, we will know what to do in the next general election,” she added.

Later, Lim said that the Penang Pakatan Rakyat government had never approved the demolition of Kampung Buah Pala.

He said any action taken was done by the private developer via a court order.

“We regret the unwarranted, highly irresponsible and irrational action of Hindraf in targeting us over the eviction of the residents.

“Hindraf wants us to act against the court order obtained by the developer to evict the residents. We cannot do this as it is against the rule of law,” he said, adding that suggestions that the state forcibly acquired the land for public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act would be “playing into the hands of the developer”.

“Doing so would lead to the developer reaping enormous profits without putting in a single sen.

“Cancelling the project would incur costs beyond the financial capability of the state government,” he said, chiding Hindraf for “not being able to distinguish who its friends and opponents are” and being blinded by rage and anger.

“Nonetheless, they have the right to hold a peaceful demonstration no matter how unreasonable it is. I have instructed my officials to accept any memorandum submitted and urge the police not to take and action that would lead to untoward incidents,” he said.

Lim said the state would not be affected by the actions of the residents turning against it and would continue to assist them.

The developer had offered compensation of up to RM200,000 per registered family which Lim said was accepted by “many”.

“But we respect the decision of the remaining residents who choose to fight it out in court. Had we not been sympathetic to their plight, the developer would have evicted them in the middle of last year when the court order was obtained,” he said.

Lim, who questioned whether the movement had been “infiltrated by Barisan Nasional collaborators”, also called on former Chief Minister Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon to give a full public explanation on why he sold the land at a “cheap price” of only RM10 per square feet and without consulting the residents.

In PETALING JAYA:, about a dozen Hindraf supporters turned up at the DAP headquarters to protest.

Supporters of the outlawed movement arrived at 3:30pm Tuesday, but were dispersed by police about 30 minutes later.

They carried posters and placards demanding that the Penang Pakatan Rakyat state government intervene and stop the demolition.

PETALING JAYA, 30 June 2009: Malay Malaysians are the group least ready to accept a non-male, non-Malay or non-Muslim as prime minister, a Merdeka Center for Opinion Research survey has found.

Of the 2,518 randomly selected Malaysian youths aged between 20 and 35 polled by the centre, only 32% of Malay Malaysians were ready to accept a woman prime minister.

More strikingly, only 7% were ready to accept a non-Malay, non-Muslim prime minister, while only 36% would accept a non-Malay but Muslim prime minister.

By contrast, more than 80% of Chinese, Indian and non-Muslim bumiputera Malaysians were ready to accept a woman, a non-Malay Muslim or a non-Malay, non-Muslim Malaysian as prime minister.

Merdeka Center program director Ibrahim Suffian said the poll was conducted between November and December 2008. He said the socio-political climate in Malaysia at that time was coloured by Barack Obama's election as US president, and the vacancy of the Kuala Terengganu parliamentary seat due to the death of the Umno incumbent.

"It is important to note that a survey is merely a snapshot, not a prediction of the future, even though a survey can pick up on certain trends," he said at a press conference today to launch the survey findings.

Survey question: How strongly would you accept a as prime minister in Malaysia? Breakdown of 2,518 respondents. Click on image for bigger view (Source: Merderka Center)

Lower racial identification

The survey also found that 43% of its respondents identified themselves primarily as Malaysians first, while 38% identified themselves by religion first. Only 15% identified themselves by ethnic categories first.

The survey posed a question — "If you can only choose one identity, would you say that you are...?" — to all respondents.

More than 50% of East Malaysians identified themselves as Malaysian first, while only 34% of respondents in the peninsula identified similarly. From the ethnic breakdown, Malay Malaysians were the lowest number of respondents who identified as Malaysians first, at 29%.

"Young Malay [Malaysians] are moving away from ethnic identification, and Islam is playing an important role in supplanting this ethnic identification," Ibrahim said.

"More than 60% of Malay Malaysian respondents saw themselves as Muslim first, while only 10% saw themselves as Malay first," he added.

Ibrahim said, however, that with this increased identification with Islam came stronger demands for a clean government, better rule of law and democratic improvements.

Interestingly, among respondents who attended Chinese medium schools, 52% identified as Malaysians first. Conversely, only 39% of respondents who attended national schools identified as Malaysians first. Ibrahim said the lower percentage in national schools could be because more Malay Malaysians attend these schools, thus dragging the percentage down.

Survey question: If you could only choose one identity, would you say that you are...?Breakdown of 1,083 respondents who provided "Malaysian" as their first choice.Click on image for bigger view (Source: Merdeka Center)

Paradoxes in identity

Ibrahim also noted that younger Malay Malaysians seem to be more socially conservative.

"They might be more vocal about calling for the abolishment of the Internal Security Act, but they are also the same group that wants concerts to be gender segregated."

The paradox of this combination of political openness and religious conservatism could also be seen in young Malay Malaysians rejecting a woman as prime minister, Ibrahim explained.

"This [conservatism] could be the result of our education policies and political orientation over the past 20 to 30 years," Ibrahim said.

He added that their rejection of a non-Muslim Malay, or a non-Muslim non-Malay Malaysian as prime minister could also indicate that young Malay Malaysians have not entirely discarded ethnic identification.

Ibrahim said these findings would probably colour the agendas of the various political parties in getting Malay Malaysian support in the future, as young Malay Malaysians would set new standards of ethics in governance and public life.

The survey concluded that "ethnicity and religion [remain] an important factor in influencing views on whether women or minorities can hold top positions in the country".

It also polled respondents on other areas such as media consumption, lifestyle choices, political efficacy, electoral participation and general issues of interest.

KUALA LUMPUR, 30 June 2009: Measures to liberalise the economy that were announced today are positive, but do not address issues of governance or affirmative action, said Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

"These measures, supposedly to attract foreign investors, are good but not [comprehensive]," Anwar told a press conference in Parliament today.

"They must be coupled with affirmative action. Liberalisation must also guarantee the welfare of the poor and marginalised," Anwar said, adding that such affirmative action should be based on need rather than race.

SHAH ALAM, 30 June 2009: Provisions in the Federal Constitution and the Islamic laws of Selangor clearly state that all parties to a dispute must be Muslim in order for proceedings to be held in the Syariah Court, the High Court here was told today.

Lawyer K Shanmuga, who is representing the family of deceased Mohan Singh a/l Janot Singh in a legal tussle over his body with the Islamic authorities, told the court this when rounding up his submissions that the dispute should be heard in the civil court as Mohan's family members are all Sikh.

Shanmuga referred High Court judge Rosnaini Saub to Item 1, List II in the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution which provided for the state to make its own laws regarding "the constitution, organisation and procedure of syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam".

ShanmugaHe also cited Section 61(3)(b) of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 that the syariah court can "hear and determine all actions and proceedings if all the parties to the actions or proceedings are Muslims".

"It's there, it's as clear as day," Shanmuga said. "It is absolutely trite that the syariah courts are in no circumstances to make decisions which affect non-Muslims."

The High Court has to decide whether the civil court or syariah court should hear the application by Mohan's family over Mohan's body.

The family is challenging the Sungai Buloh Hospital's decision not to release his body to them for cremation according to Sikh rites, and to let the Selangor Islamic Council (Mais) determine if Mohan was Muslim at his time of death.

Mohan, 41, died of a heart attack on 25 May 2009 and his body has been kept at the hospital mortuary pending an outcome of the dispute.

The family is contending that Mohan had never converted to Islam and that he did not practise Islam while he was alive. Mais is claiming that Mohan converted in 1992, citing his certificate of conversion as proof.

Entities are not Muslim

In arguing that only Muslims could appear in the syariah court, Shanmuga said that Mais could not be defined as a Muslim because it was a body corporate.

He also argued that neither could the other respondents, such as the federal government, be defined as Muslim. And since the applicants, Mohan's family, were Sikh, the syariah court had no jurisdiction to hear the dispute as none of the parties could be defined as Muslims.

Besides Mais, Mohan's family have named the Health Ministry director-general, the Sungai Buloh Hospital director-general, and the Selangor and federal governments as respondents. The Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduisn, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) are also named as respondents, but it has argued in support of Mohan's family.

Wrong judgments

Earlier, Mais's lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla told the court that past judgements which may have been wrongly decided or which were per incuriamshould still be followed.

Balwant Haniff Khatri said this when replying to submissions by the MCCBCHST in support of Mohan's family. Lawyer for the consultative council, Balwant Singh Sidhu, had said that certain past judgments by the federal courts giving jurisdiction to the syariah court to decide on religious status were "not good authority".

Balwant had said such judgments had influenced the outcome of the Lina Joy case wrongly, in which the Federal Court rejected her appeal to have the word "Islam" removed from her identity card, and for the syariah court to determine if she was an apostate.

Haniff Khatri cited Dalip Bhagwan Singh vs Public Prosecutor 1997 in which the Federal Court said it was not for a high court to declare any superior court's decision as having been wrongly decided.

He told the court that even if a higher court's judgment may have been per incuriam, the court still had to apply the decision and could not depart from it.

Tomorrow, 1 July, will be the final day for the court to round up of submissions and replies from the applicants. Judge Rosnani said she would set a separate date for a decision.

KUALA LUMPUR, 30 June 2009: Amendments to three laws concerning matters of religious conversion will not be tabled in the current Parliamentary sitting, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said today.

"I was confident in April (that they would be tabled), but I have been proven wrong," the de facto law minister told a press conference in Parliament today.

"We may discuss the bills in December. But I cannot say this with certainty," he added.

Nazri was commenting on the Rulers' Council's decision not to give their consent to the amendments. The Rulers, guardians of Islam in their respective states, yesterday said that the amendments pertaining to matters of religion and conversion had to be referred to state religious authorities.

This meant that the changes to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act and Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act will not be tabled before the current Parliamentary sitting ends on 2 July.

According to Nazri, the amendments have been stalled because the cabinet formulated them as a package. This means that even though the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act does not concern Islam specifically, its amendments cannot be tabled without the Rulers' blessing.

"Disappointed? Yes, I am," Nazri said, answering questions by reporters as to how he felt about the delay.

Nazri failed to reveal the Rulers' Council's specific reservations.

"They had their queries. We answered their queries," Nazri said, noting that the amendments were formulated after consultation with all stakeholders.

"The Attorney General (Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail) engaged with all the non-governmental organisations, the muftis, and representatives from all religions," Nazri said. "We have done our homework."

"But if they (the Rulers' Council) want time, we will give them time," Nazri said.

The Kampung Buah Pala residents have released a statement today, expressing dissatisfaction with Pakatan politicians who had promised to defend their right to the land during the general election campaign last year.

The villagers, who had earlier filed a complaint with the MACC over the land deal, are also claiming that not all families and households were offered compensation.

Some excerpts from the statement:

If the present State Government cannot stop the demolition then it is adopting the abuse of power by the previous government and is a party to it.

…We ask the state government to act now and at least stop and postpone the demolition. It can direct the developer and the police to do so. It should not abdicate its responsibility and shirk its responsibility.

Act now or forever be condemned. Please don’t give us platitudes. Don’t blame the previous BN government; you have the power now. Are you useless?

You can act to set aside the (highly questionable) transfers without paying a cent. Why are you not doing so? Are the developers tying your hands?

Are you now collaborating with and an accomplice of the previous government’s abuse…?

Are you friend or enemy? Are you part of the solution or part of the problem?

The offer by the developer is an eyewash. It is only for the few registered houses. What about the other unnumbered houses? What about the other extended families? Each house is occupied by several families. What about them? What about the tenants? They have been offered nothing.

We want out land which is our life. Please don’t mislead the public and side with the developers and Umno.

Do not use sweet promises to fish our votes and gain our support.

This village has historical and heritage value which cannot be bought by mighty capital and high force

There are over 23 registered houses, over 11 unregistered houses and 41 families and other residents. Compensation was never offered per family at all till now.

If the State Governement does not act now, it will only assist the developer to wipe out the only historical and heritage Tamil village in Malaysia.

Once our houses are demolished and we are thrown out and scattered, wherever we may be we will campaign against those who made false and empty promises…